countryboy
Verified User
Somebody better tell Obama, because this is what he said on December 6, 2011. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.go...6/remarks-president-economy-osawatomie-kansas
Nationalism and Nazi ideology
- Thread starter kudzu
- Start date
Somebody better tell Obama, because this is what he said on December 6, 2011. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.go...6/remarks-president-economy-osawatomie-kansas
countryboy
Verified User
Mason Michaels
Verified User
Till Trump
So if "Nationalists" are the so bad ... what explains these countries reasons for independence?
"Central American Nations Declare Independence From Spain. This day in 1821 was an historic day for much of Central America as, after almost three centuries of colonial rule, the nations of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica, gained independence from Spain."
Even here it is difficult to understand how a Spanish "satellite" State can become free from Spain ---except if it's in regards to keeping the wealth for themselves.
How was Hispanola a colony of Spain?
Is Alaska a colony of the USA? Is Guam a colony of the USA?
"When did South America become independent?
Only in 1822 did Ecuador fully gain independence and became part of Gran Colombia, from which it withdrew in 1830. At the Battle of Pichincha, near present-day Quito, Ecuador on May 24, 1822, General Antonio José de Sucre's forces defeated a Spanish force defending Quito."
"When did Spain recognize Nicaragua's independence?
Nicaragua's independence became a fact in September 1821. The inhabitants of the Spanish province of Nicaragua, as well as people from other colonies in this region, felt it was time for complete independence."
"What country owns Costa Rica?
Costa Rica. Costa Rica (officially called Republic of Costa Rica), is a country in Central America. It is bordered by Nicaragua to the north, Panama to the southeast, the Pacific Ocean to the west, and the Caribbean Sea to the east. The official language of Costa Rica is Spanish."
"Central American Nations Declare Independence From Spain. This day in 1821 was an historic day for much of Central America as, after almost three centuries of colonial rule, the nations of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica, gained independence from Spain."
Even here it is difficult to understand how a Spanish "satellite" State can become free from Spain ---except if it's in regards to keeping the wealth for themselves.
How was Hispanola a colony of Spain?
Is Alaska a colony of the USA? Is Guam a colony of the USA?
"When did South America become independent?
Only in 1822 did Ecuador fully gain independence and became part of Gran Colombia, from which it withdrew in 1830. At the Battle of Pichincha, near present-day Quito, Ecuador on May 24, 1822, General Antonio José de Sucre's forces defeated a Spanish force defending Quito."
"When did Spain recognize Nicaragua's independence?
Nicaragua's independence became a fact in September 1821. The inhabitants of the Spanish province of Nicaragua, as well as people from other colonies in this region, felt it was time for complete independence."
"What country owns Costa Rica?
Costa Rica. Costa Rica (officially called Republic of Costa Rica), is a country in Central America. It is bordered by Nicaragua to the north, Panama to the southeast, the Pacific Ocean to the west, and the Caribbean Sea to the east. The official language of Costa Rica is Spanish."
And then there are the Satellite countries of the old Soviet Block ---where they un-patriotic?
While the 18th century in the Balkans was dominated by the steady decline of Ottoman power, the outstanding feature of the 19th century was the creation of nation-states on what had been Ottoman territory. Because the emergence of national consciousness and the creation of nation-states were conditioned by local factors, each nation evolved in an individual way. Nevertheless, some general characteristics are discernible.
The first is that external factors were the ultimate determinants. No Balkan people, no matter how strong their sense of national purpose, could achieve independent statehood, or even a separate administrative identity, without external support. Foreign military intervention on behalf of particular groups was common: Russia aided the Serbs and Bulgarians, while Britain, France, and Russia intervened for the Greeks. The Romanians benefited from the wars of Italian and German unification, and Albanian independence would have been impossible had the Balkan states not smashed Ottoman power in Europe in the First Balkan War (1912–13).
Them dar DAMNED NATIONALISTS! Who did they think they were?!
While the 18th century in the Balkans was dominated by the steady decline of Ottoman power, the outstanding feature of the 19th century was the creation of nation-states on what had been Ottoman territory. Because the emergence of national consciousness and the creation of nation-states were conditioned by local factors, each nation evolved in an individual way. Nevertheless, some general characteristics are discernible.
The first is that external factors were the ultimate determinants. No Balkan people, no matter how strong their sense of national purpose, could achieve independent statehood, or even a separate administrative identity, without external support. Foreign military intervention on behalf of particular groups was common: Russia aided the Serbs and Bulgarians, while Britain, France, and Russia intervened for the Greeks. The Romanians benefited from the wars of Italian and German unification, and Albanian independence would have been impossible had the Balkan states not smashed Ottoman power in Europe in the First Balkan War (1912–13).
Them dar DAMNED NATIONALISTS! Who did they think they were?!
FYI...........
StoneByStone
It's OK to Be White
Saying Trump is a Nazi because he called himself a Nationalist is just as stupid as saying Bernie Sanders is a Stalinist because he calls himself a Socialist.
nationalism | Definition, History, & Facts | Britannica.com
Nationalism is an ideology that emphasizes loyalty, devotion, or allegiance to a nation or nation-state and holds that such obligations outweigh other individual or group interests.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/nationalism
Nationalism is a modern movement. Throughout history people have been attached to their native soil, to the traditions of their parents, and to established territorial authorities; but it was not until the end of the 18th century that nationalism began to be a generally recognized sentiment molding public and private life and one of the great, if not the greatest, single determining factors of modern history.
Because of its dynamic vitality and its all-pervading character, nationalism is often thought to be very old; sometimes it is mistakenly regarded as a permanent factor in political behaviour. Actually, the American and French revolutions may be regarded as its first powerful manifestations.
After penetrating the new countries of Latin America it spread in the early 19th century to central Europe and from there, toward the middle of the century, to eastern and southeastern Europe. At the beginning of the 20th century nationalism flowered in the ancient lands of Asia and Africa. Thus the 19th century has been called the age of nationalism in Europe, while the 20th century has witnessed the rise and struggle of powerful national movements throughout Asia and Africa.
READ MORE ON THIS TOPIC
Margaret Mead
education: The influence of nationalism
The Enlightenment was cosmopolitan in its effort to spread the light of reason, but from the very beginning of the age there were nationalistic tendencies to be seen in varying shades. Although Rousseau himself was generally concerned with universal man in such works as…
Identification Of State And People
Nationalism, translated into world politics, implies the identification of the state or nation with the people—or at least the desirability of determining the extent of the state according to ethnographic principles. In the age of nationalism, but only in the age of nationalism, the principle was generally recognized that each nationality should form a state—its state—and that the state should include all members of that nationality. Formerly states, or territories under one administration, were not delineated by nationality.
Men did not give their loyalty to the nation-state but to other, different forms of political organization: the city-state, the feudal fief and its lord, the dynastic state, the religious group, or the sect. The nation-state was nonexistent during the greater part of history, and for a very long time it was not even regarded as an ideal. In the first 15 centuries of the Christian Era, the ideal was the universal world-state, not loyalty to any separate political entity. The Roman Empire had set the great example, which survived not only in the Holy Roman Empire of the Middle Ages but also in the concept of the res publica christiana (“Christian republic” or community) and in its later secularized form of a united world civilization.
As political allegiance, before the age of nationalism, was not determined by nationality, so civilization was not thought of as nationally determined. During the Middle Ages civilization was looked upon as determined religiously; for all the different nationalities of Christendom as well as for those of Islām there was but one civilization—Christian or Muslim—and but one language of culture—Latin (or Greek) or Arabic (or Persian). Later, in the periods of the Renaissance and of Classicism, it was the ancient Greek and Roman civilizations that became a universal norm, valid for all peoples and all times. Still later, French civilization was accepted throughout Europe as the valid civilization for educated people of all nationalities.
It was only at the end of the 18th century that, for the first time, civilization was considered to be determined by nationality. It was then that the principle was put forward that a man could be educated only in his own mother tongue, not in languages of other civilizations and other times, whether they were classical languages or the literary creations of other peoples who had reached a high degree of civilization.
Cultural Nationalism
From the end of the 18th century on, the nationalization of education and public life went hand in hand with the nationalization of states and political loyalties. Poets and scholars began to emphasize cultural nationalism first. They reformed the mother tongue, elevated it to the rank of a literary language, and delved deep into the national past. Thus they prepared the foundations for the political claims for national statehood soon to be raised by the people in whom they had kindled the spirit.
Before the 18th century there had been evidences of national feeling among certain groups at certain periods, especially in times of stress and conflict.
The rise of national feeling to major political importance was encouraged by a number of complex developments: the creation of large, centralized states ruled by absolute monarchs who destroyed the old feudal allegiances; the secularization of life and of education, which fostered the vernacular languages and weakened the ties of church and sect; the growth of commerce, which demanded larger territorial units to allow scope for the dynamic spirit of the rising middle classes and their capitalistic enterprise. This large, unified territorial state, with its political and economic centralization, became imbued in the 18th century with a new spirit—an emotional fervour similar to that of religious movements in earlier periods.
Under the influence of the new theories of the sovereignty of the people and the rights of man, the people replaced the king as the centre of the nation. No longer was the king the nation or the state; the state had become the people’s state, a national state, a fatherland. State became identified with nation, as civilization became identified with national civilization.
That development ran counter to the conceptions that had dominated political thought for the preceding 2,000 years. Hitherto man had commonly stressed the general and the universal and had regarded unity as the desirable goal. Nationalism stressed the particular and parochial, the differences, and the national individualities.
Those tendencies became more pronounced as nationalism developed. Its less attractive characteristics were not at first apparent. In the 17th and 18th centuries the common standards of Western civilization, the regard for the universally human, the faith in reason (one and the same everywhere) as well as in common sense, the survival of Christian and Stoic traditions—all of these were still too strong to allow nationalism to develop fully and to disrupt society. Thus nationalism in its beginning was thought to be compatible with cosmopolitan convictions and with a general love of mankind, especially in western Europe and North America.
European Nationalism
English Puritanism and nationalism
The first full manifestation of modern nationalism occurred in 17th-century England, in the Puritan revolution. England had become the leading nation in scientific spirit, in commercial enterprise, in political thought and activity.
Swelled by an immense confidence in the new age, the English people felt upon their shoulders the mission of history, a sense that they were at a great turning point from which a new true reformation and a new liberty would start. In the English revolution an optimistic humanism merged with Calvinist ethics; the influence of the Old Testament gave form to the new nationalism by identifying the English people with ancient Israel.
The new message, carried by the new people not only for England but for all mankind, was expressed in the writings of John Milton, in whose famous vision the idea of liberty was seen spreading from Britain, “celebrated for endless ages as a soil most genial to the growth of liberty,” to all the corners of the earth.
Surrounded by congregated multitudes, I now imagine that…I behold the nations of the earth recovering that liberty which they so long had lost; and that the people of this island are…disseminating the blessings of civilization and freedom among cities, kingdoms and nations.
English nationalism, then, was thus much nearer to its religious matrix than later nationalisms that rose after secularization had made greater progress. The nationalism of the 18th century shared with it, however, its enthusiasm for liberty, its humanitarian character, its emphasis upon the individual and his rights and upon the human community as above all national divisions.
The rise of English nationalism coincided with the rise of the English trading middle classes. It found its final expression in John Locke’s political philosophy, and it was in that form that it influenced American and French nationalism in the following century.
American nationalism was a typical product of the 18th century. British settlers in North America were influenced partly by the traditions of the Puritan revolution and the ideas of Locke and partly by the new rational interpretation given to English liberty by contemporary French philosophers. American settlers became a nation engaged in a fight for liberty and individual rights. They based that fight on current political thought, especially as expressed by Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine.
It was a liberal and humanitarian nationalism that regarded America as in the vanguard of mankind on its march to greater liberty, equality, and happiness for all. The ideas of the 18th century found their first political realization in the Declaration of Independence and in the birth of the American nation. Their deep influence was felt in the French Revolution.
continued